Frankly, the only way to understand samaya is to receive empowerment and practice assiduously. Just as an example, in Sarma practices one recites the various aspects and vows of Samaya during "self-empowerment" rituals, and these are the same as those given during the empowerment. One of the common samayas is to not discuss the samaya or other aspects of practice with those who have not received empowerment, so Malcolm's quip about "Fight Club" is right on the money! Funny, too.

Bit of a catch-22 isn't it?

On one hand, we're told to be scrutinous, to not jump into empowerments without knowing what we are getting into. And yet here you are, saying you can only know what you are getting into by jumping into it.

I do wonder why it is so difficult to give a straightforward explanation of it. It seems like something that ought to be taken on with clear comprehension.

"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra

I don't think it can be any clearer Anders.
Some Catch 22 scenarios are unavoidable.
You will not be able to process what happens in a Samaya relationship unless you take that leap.
No logic or cognition or deduction will enable an understanding of Samaya from the outside of the tent.

And if that makes it an impossible prospect for any individual then another side of that is that we do not choose a particular teacher initially..She/he chooses us.

Frankly, the only way to understand samaya is to receive empowerment and practice assiduously. Just as an example, in Sarma practices one recites the various aspects and vows of Samaya during "self-empowerment" rituals, and these are the same as those given during the empowerment. One of the common samayas is to not discuss the samaya or other aspects of practice with those who have not received empowerment, so Malcolm's quip about "Fight Club" is right on the money! Funny, too.

Bit of a catch-22 isn't it?

On one hand, we're told to be scrutinous, to not jump into empowerments without knowing what we are getting into. And yet here you are, saying you can only know what you are getting into by jumping into it.

I do wonder why it is so difficult to give a straightforward explanation of it. It seems like something that ought to be taken on with clear comprehension.

Sort of, but you can find out about many aspects of the relationship which are relevant, such as:

Does the Guru seem like a person I want to make a commitment to follow?
Would this Guru want to make a commitment to me?
What specific practice commitments are involved once I have received the empowerment?
What vows may be required as a pre-requisite and what vows may I be asked to take as part of the empowerment and adhere to afterwards?

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

I think he is more interested in the "why" it is the foundation of the Vajrayana path.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

It is a set of commitments one makes to the guru, one's vajra siblings, and the path in general. Though they are in fact secret, they are openly discussed by many people here all the time.

karma-mechanically speaking, it is more than that though, right? What role do they play as an essential component of tantra practise? What it is, technically speaking, that makes it so crucial?

Without a commitment, how can we accomplish anything, let alone liberation?

Samaya is a way to structure our commitment. It is a way to guide ourselves in our daily actions. It helps us to know which actions are conducive to enlightenment, and which are not. It would be hard to achieve liberation without understanding how various actions, attitudes, and beliefs might hinder our ability to do so.

Samaya is more than this as well, because its also a commitment to achieve liberation. Its not just a hobby, or something we do on the weekends, or something for the next life. It is for NOW, we need to achieve this as quickly as possible. Vajrayana is not about taking "countless aeons" to achieve liberation, but rather, ensuring ones liberation at least in the bardo with every attempt made to realize it right now. If we can at least gain that kind of realization and confidence, that is the fundamental goal, at least in my own opinion.

Samaya keeps us mindful, and if we know what Samaya is then we know when we break it, then we can repair it and feel genuine remorse for having broken it. As westerners we probably break Samaya on a daily basis, so its good to be aware of this, to be humble, and to confess/purify often.

Otherwise we are like drunkards on the path, stumbling about, hoping to reach our destination, most likely just going astray and breaking a bunch of stuff along the way.

Karmically it is a commitment made with body, speech and mind. The mental attitudes, the verbal promises, and the physical actions/self control that are the embodiment of Samaya. So karmically it is cultivating virtues in these and staving off non-virtue.

Look at Dudjom Rinpoche as an example. Although many considered him one of the most highly realized Lamas around, his confession speaks volumes about not only his humility, but the nature of humanity and the dangers of delusion. As human beings we are prone to constant attachments, constant errors, constant cravings. Delusions, hatred, desire, aversion, jealousy. These things are often hard coded into our biology, conditioned into us not only from birth but karmically since beginningless time. Even if we dont believe in rebirth, strictly from an evolutionary perspective we can see that for billions of years the organism which has evolved into this current body is hard wired with numerous delusive and suffering inducing systems. Designed to keep us alive, but not designed to make us happy or liberate us.

This is how we should think, although we should not fall into self hatred. Rather we should try to regard ourselves like this with humility. Samaya is like a rope that tethers us to the stake of Dharma, and mindfulness of it is what keeps us from detaching and parting ways with the Dharma.

This question may have been posed at some point and I may have missed it.

Nonetheless I was curious to know whether there are different....levels of samaya (for lack of a better way of putting it at the moment) based upon what is being received?

For example, would one have greater samaya with the guru whom one has received pointing out from? Then by definition, this would in fact be one's root guru.

If one has not recognized their minds nature, and thus doesn't have a root guru outside of strong devotion,then would one have greater samaya with a guru whom one has received the four empowerments from, rather then let's say an outer yoga empowerment or even receiving an empowerment as a blessing?

Or in fact should it be thought of in a completely different manner, that samaya is samaya as long as one has received an empowerment, transmission and permission to practice a certain set of teachings regardless if one has a personal student-guru relationship or not?

I actually think it would be better to have a samaya 101 thread, lock it and then disallow further samaya threads. I think they have the potential to do more harm than good to the perception and reception of Vajrayana and we should recognize that.

Please explain further as to how it is easily misunderstood. Maybe it depends on the perspective of the reader. I'm usually fairly confused. How, in your estimation, could Khenpo Yonten Gompo improve his teaching to be less opaque? Thanks.

Once again, I don't think these discussions are at all appropriate in a public setting. The internet's a big place and this is a topic that practitioners should dedicate some serious time researching high and low, far and wide before coming to any conclusions about appropriate and inappropriate conduct of body speech and mind.

Whether you follow common or uncommon Mahayana then the gross and subtle, context and realization-dependent nuances of vows of conduct and their relationship with view should be understood sooner rather than later to ensure you are securing yours and others benefit rather than bringing harm. People should also consult with their teachers.